The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-11-27
SHOULD BE FOUND GUILTY
Judge Irwin Gives Instructions to that
Effect in the Transfer-Car Case.
The Jury, However. Deliberates Overthe Mat
ter Nearly all Day, and then Fails to
Agree on Verdict.

The trial Of the Citizens Street Railway Com
pany for maintaining a nuisance by stationng
the transfer car Washington street was con-
cIuded yesterday morning Judge Twins in
srructions were quite lengthy, and in plain
terms informed the jury that it was its duty to
find the street-car company guilty. With refer
ence to the claim of the company that it had a
right to station the car in its present position by
reason of permission from the Council, the Judge
said: "The permanent obstruction of public
street is in itself unlawful act, essentially in
terfering with the free of property. The right
of adjacent proprietors and to the highway
is one of which the Legislature itself cannot de-
prive them without compensation; nor can the
municipal authorities, Notwithstanding their
control over the streets of the city, authorize
such an obstruction. /, therefore, charge you,
the law in this case that the city of Indianap-
oils had no power authority through an ordi-
nance resolution of its Common Council, or
otherwise. to grant to the defendant the right to
place the street obstruction of perma-
nent nature; and could not thus authorize the
defendant to locate or station at a given point,
public street OF the city, q transfer car,
which, by reason Of its stationary character or
continuance at such point become and was OF
permanent nature, if you should so find. because
the same would be such obstruction as to
constitute nuisance per Sc" {.
Referring to tho plea that the car was pub
lie benefit, he said: ''The unlawful obstruction
of a public highway affects injuriously the
rights of all the citizens of the State. The
right to pass and repass upon pub
lie highway is not restricted to any part of 1t,
for the public are entitled, not only to a free
passage along the highway. but to a free passage
along any and every portion of it not in the
actual use. al the time. of some other traveller
The question in all OF this character is not
whether travel actually interfered with,
but whether there was unlawful encroach-
ment upon q public street by the erection of
permanent obstruction And it is no defense to
say that the encroachment is really for the ben
eft of the public"
In closing he said: IF you find from the ev-
idence. beyond reasonable doubt. that Wash
ington street is situated in the city of Ipdianap-
oils, Marion county. Indiana, in a densely pop
uated neighborhood. and constantly used by
the citizens of said State, for the purpose of
passage and repassage, public highway. and
was situated and used on the LIST day of April,
occupying and maintaining, on said street,
near to and east of the corner of Illinois street,,
a structure or transfer car of a permanent nat
ure. in length about thirty Eight feet, and in
width about nine feet then you should find the
defendant guilty, such an obstruction of a pub
lie highway being nuisance within itself"
The jury retired at 10 o'clock and supposIng
they would act upon the Judges instructions
and return a verdict of guilty at once, the at
torneys did not leave the courtroom. Noon
came without any verdict, and the jury retired
to its room again last evening without having
reached conclusion. At s o'clock they reported
that they could not agree on a verdict